TRACKING WILDLIFE BY SATELLITE 47 



n=io n=50 



10 20 30 40 50 100 300 



Locations/Year 



Fig. 43. Cost-benefit analysis of satellite versus conventional VHP telemetry. Porcupine caribou herd example. 



transmitter life was increased to at least 1 8 months. In this 

 example, satellite telemetry was cost effective if more 

 than 62 (n = 10 collars deployed) locations per year were 

 needed to meet study objectives. If 50 collars were de- 

 ployed, satellite telemetry would only be cost effective if 

 more than one location per day were required. The cost to 

 obtain daily locations using VHP telemetry was three 

 times that of using satellite telemetry for the 10 collar 

 example; costs were similar if 50 collars were deployed. 

 The third example compared costs for a study of mule 

 deer movements in Idaho (Fig. 45). Clover traps (Clover 

 1956) were used to capture deer for the first time, but 

 recaptures required the use of a helicopter and net gun. 

 Radio-tracking costs were again low compared to the Por- 

 cupine caribou herd example. If 10 collars were deployed, 

 satellite telemetry was cost effective when at least 42 

 locations per year were needed. The cost to obtain daily 

 locations using VHP telemetry was four times that of 

 using satellite telemetry. In the 50 collar example, the per- 

 animal cost to relocate deer using VHP telemetry was 



reduced, and 315 locations each year were required before 

 satellite telemetry became cost effective. 



Directions for Future Research 



Our work involved various applications of satellite te- 

 lemetry in wildlife research. Many of these were not possi- 

 ble just two or three years ago. We expect that continued 

 work on both the technical and analytical aspects will 

 refine the list of applications for which satellite telemetry 

 is appropriate. 



More researchers could consider applications for satel- 

 lite telemetry if the precision and accuracy of location 

 estimates were improved. Many have expressed doubts 

 about using satellite data for analyzing habitat use on as 

 fine a scale as is desired, primarily because of imprecision 

 of locations. Improved precision in the future might come 

 from improvements in the PTT itself, from the algorithms 

 used to calculate locations, or in analysis routines in a GIS 

 that can correct exactly for elevational bias. 



